

^^ ^^ \t 



.o^.->,'^o. ./^>^'\> .^°/^<>- /' 








'* -0 



i°-^* 


















^9^ 



I ■« 






^ ^ " o, 






^0 r 





LOYAL PUBLICATION SOCIETY, 

863 BROADWAY. 




JTo^ 51. 



P0 ^x^txii ill ^UtK 



si^EEOiEi o:f 



Hon. CHARLES SUMNER, 



ON THE 



PROPOSED AMENDMENT OF THE CONSTITUTION ABOLISHING 
SLAVERY THROUGH THE UNITED STATES. 

Li the Senate of the United States, April 8th, 1864. 







NEW YORK : 

Published by the Loyal League Publication Society. 

1864. 




LOYAL PUBLICATION SOCIETY, 

863 BROADWAY, NEW YORK. 

DECJ-ARATORY RESOLUTION- . 

The object of the Society is expressed in the following Resolu- 
tion^ formally adopted hy unanimous vote of the Society, at 
its first Anniversary Meeting, February 13, 18G4. 

Resolved and declared, That the object of the Loyal Publication Society 
is, and shall be, to pubhsh and distribute tracts, papers and journals, of 
unquestionable loyalty, throughout the United States, in the cities and the 
country, in the army and navy, and in hospitals, thus to diffuse knowledge 
and stimulate a broad national patriotism, and to aid in the suppression of the 
Rebelhon by the extinction of its causes, and in the preservation of the in- 
tegrity of the Nation, by counteracting the efforts of the advocates of a dis- 
graceful and disintegrating Peace. 

Persons sympathising witli the design of this Society, and 
wishing to contribute to its support, may address 

MORRIS KETCHUM, Esq., Treasurer, 40 Exchange Place, 

by whom receipts will be promptly returned. 

OFFICERS OF THE SOCIETY. 

President* Treasurer* 

FRANCIS LIEBER. MORRIS KETCHUM. 

Secretary. 

JOHN AUSTIN STEVENS, Jb. 

Finance Committee* 

JAMES A. ROOSEVELT, Chairman, 

T. B. CODDINGTON, WILLIAM E. DODGE, Jr. 

DAVID DOWS, ^^,,, „ ,.^T,a.^.T JACKSON S. SCHULTZ. 
' LEVI P. MORTON. 

l:*ubllcutlon Committee* 

JAMES McKAYE, Ghairmajt, 
GROSVENOR P. LOWREY, JOHN AUSTIN STEVENS, Ja., 

DR. R SCHUTZ, CHARLES ASTOR BRISTED, 

GEO. P. PUTNAM, THEODORE G. GLAUBENSKLEE. 

ExccutlTe Coniinlttee* 

WILLIAM T. BLODGETT, CnATRWAN, 
CHRISTIAN E. DETMOLD, J. BUTLER WRIGHT, 

GEORGE GIBBS, LE GRAND B. CANNO:^ 

SINCLAIR TOUSEY, W. C. CHURCH, 

CHARLES BUTLER GEORGE BLISS, Jr. 



LOYAL PUBLICATION SOCIETY, 

863 BROADWAY. 

J\^o. 51. 

NO PROPEllTY IN MAN. 



SI^EECKC OF 



Hon. CHARLES SUMNER, 



ON THE 



PROPOSED AMENDMENT OF THE CONSTITUTION ABOLISHING SLAVERY 
THROUGH THE UNITED STATES. 

In the Senate of the United States, April 8th, 1864. 




NEW YORK ; 

Published by the Loyal Publication Society. 



186 4 



t 

3d ^«t^ 






IL^ 



Loyal Leagues, Clubs, or individuals may obtain 
any of our Publications at the cost price, by application to 
t\e Executive Committee, or by calling at the Rooms of the 
Society, No, 863 Broadway, where all information may be 
obtained relating to the Society, 



..... jangre 
x'eabody Inat.,Balto, 
Jan. -28 



< n 



NO PROPERTY IN MAN. 



>> 



SPEECH OF 

HON. CHARLES SUMNER, 



ON THE 



Proposed Amendment of the Constitution Abolishing Slavery 
through the United States, 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, APRIL 8, 1864. 



"Maj^ not Congress pronounce all slaves free? The Constitution speaks to the 
point. They have the poicer in clear and uncqvicocal terms, and will clearly and certainly 



ixercise it. — Patrick Henry 



Mr. SUMNER. Mr. President, if an angel from the skies or 
a stranger from another planet were permitted to visit this earth 
and to examine its surface, who can doubt that his eyes would rest 
with astonishment upon the outstretched extent and exhaustlesa 
resources of this Republic of the New World, young in years but 
already rooted beyond any dynasty in history? In proportion as 
he considered and understood all those things among us which 
enter into and constitute the national life, his astonishment would 
increase, for he would find a numerous people, powerful beyond 
precedent, without a king or a noble, but with the schooLnaster 
instead. And yet the astonishment which he confessed, as all 
these things appeared before him, would swell into marvel as he 
learned that in this Republic, which had arrested his admiration, 
where there was neither king nor noble, but the schoolmaster in- 
stead, there were four million human beings in abject bondage, 
degraded to be chattels, under the pretense of property in man, 
driven by the lash like beasts, despoiled of all rights, even the 



right to knowledge and the sacred right of family ; so that the 
relation of husband and wife was impossible and no parent could 
claim his own child; while all were condemned to brutish igno- 
rance. Startled by what he beheld, the stranger would naturally 
inquire by what authority, under what sanction, and through what 
terms of law or Constitution, this fearful inconsistency, so shock- 
ing to human nature itself, continued to be upheld. But his 
growing astonishment would know no bounds, when he was pointed 
to the Constitution of the United States, as the final guardian and 
conservator of this peculiar and many-headed wickedness. 

"And is it true," the stranger would exclaim, "that in laying 
the foundations of this Republic, dedicated to human rights, all 
these wrongs have been positively established ?" He would ask 
to see that Constitution and to know the fatal words by which 
the sacrifice was commanded. The trembling with which he be- 
gan its perusal would be succeeded by joy as he finished it ; for 
he would find nothing in that golden text, not a single sentence, 
phrase, or word even, to serve as origin, authority, or apology, 
for the outrage. And then his astonishment, already knowing no 
bounds, would break forth anew, as he exclaimed, " Shameful and 
irrational as is slarery, it is not more shameful or irrational than 
that unsupported interpretation which undertakes to make your 
Constitution the final guardian and conservator of this terrible 
and unpardonable denial of human rights." 

Such a stranger as I have described, coming from afar, with 
eyes which no local bias had distorted, and with understanding 
which no local custom had disturbed, would naturally see the 
Constitution precisely as it is in its actual text, and he would in- 
terpret it in its true sense, without prepossession or prejudice. — 
Of course he would know, what all jurisprudence teaches and 
what all reason confirms, that human rights cannot be taken away 
by any indirection or by any vain imagining of something that 
was intended but was not said, and, as a natural consequence, that 
slavery can exist — if exist it can at all — only by virtue of a posi^ 
live text, and that what is true of slavery is true also of all its 
incidents ; and the enlightened stranger would insist that in all 
interpretation of the Constitution, that cardinal principal must 
never for a moment be out of mind, but must be kept ever forward 
as guide and master, that slavery cannot stand o?i inference, nor can 
any support of slavery stand on inference. Thus informed, and 
in the light of a pervasive principle. 

" IIow far tliat little candle throws its beams !" 

he would peruse the Constitution from beginning to end, from its 
opening preamble to its final amendment, and then the joyful 
opinion would be given. 



There are three things which he would observe : first and fore- 
most, that the dismal words " slave " and " slavery " do not ap- 
pear in the Constitution ; so that if the unnatural pretension of 
property in man lurk anywhere in that text, it is under a feigned 
name or an alias^ which of itself is cause of suspicion, while an 
imperative rule renders its recognition impossible. Next, he 
would consider the preamble, which is the key to open the whole 
succeeding instrument; but here no single word can be found 
which does not open the Constitution to freedom and close it to 
slavery. The object of the Constitution is announced to be "in 
order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure do- 
mestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the 
general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves 
and our posterity;" all of which, in every particular, is absolutely 
inconsistent with slavery. And thirdly, he would observe those 
time-honored, most efficacious, chain-breaking words in the Amend- 
ments : " No person shall he deprived of life, liberty^ or property, 
without due process of law.''^ Scorning all false interpretations 
and glosses which may have been fastened upon the Constitution 
as a support of slavery, and with these three things before him, 
he would naturally declare that there was nothing in the original 
text on which this hideous wrong could be founded anywhere 
within the sphere of its operation. With astonishment he would 
ask again by what strange delusion or hallucination the reason 
had been so far overcome as to recognize slavery in the Constitu- 
tion, when plainly it is not there, and cannot be there ? The 
answer is humiliating, but it is easy. 

People naturally find in texts of Scripture the support of their 
own religious opinions or prejudices ; and, in the same way, they 
naturally find in texts of the Constitution the support of their 
own political opinions or prejudices. And this may not be in 
either case because Scripture or Constitution, when truly interpre- 
ted, support these opinions or prejudices ; but because people are 
apt to find in texts simply a reflection of themselves. Most 
clearly and indubitably, whoever finds any support of slavery in 
the Constitution of the United States has first found such support 
in himself; not that he will hesitate, perhaps, to condemn slavery 
in words of approved gentleness, but because from unhappy edu- 
cation or more unhappy insensibility to this wrong, he has already 
conceded to it a certain traditional foothold of immunity, which 
he straightway transfers from himself to the Constitution. In 
dealing with this subject, it is not the Constitution, so much as 
human nature itself, which has been at fault. Let the people 
change, and the Constitution will change also ; for the Constitu- 
tion is but the shadow, while the people are the substance. 



But under the influence of the present struggle for national 
life, and in obedience to its incessant exigencies, the people have ' 
already changed, and in nothing so much as slavery. Old opin- 
ions and prejudices have dissolved, and that traditional foothold 
which slavery once possessed has been gradually weakened until 
now it scarcely exists. Naturally this change must sooner or 
later show itself in the interpretation of the Constitution. But 
it is already visible even there, in the concession of powers over 
slavery which were formerly denied. The time, then, has come 
when the Constitution, which has been so long interpreted for 
slavery, may be interpreted for freedom. This is one stage of tri- 
umph. Universal emancipation, which is at hand, can be won 
only by complete emancipation of the Constitution itself, which 
has been degraded to wear chains so long that its real character 
is scarcely known. 

Sometimes the concession is made on the ground of military 
necessity. The capacious war powers of the Constitution are in- 
voked, and it is said that in their legitimate exercise slavery may 
be destroyed. There is much in this concession; more even than 
is imagined by many from whom it proceeds. It is war, say they, 
which puts these powers in motion ; for they forget that wherever 
slavery exists there is perpetual war — that slavery itself is a state 
of war between two races, where one is for the moment victor — 
pictured accurately by Jefferson when he described it as " permit- 
ting one half of the citizens to trample on the rights of the other, 
transforming those into enemies, and these into despots." There- 
fore, wherever slavery exists, even in seeming peace, the war pow- 
ers may be invoked to put an end to a condition which is interne- . 
cine, and to overthrow pretensions which are hostile to every at- 
tribute of the Almighty. 

But it is not on military necessity alone that the concession is 
made. There are many who, as they read the Constitution now, 
see its powers over slavery more clearly than before. The old 
superstition is abandoned ; and they join with Patrick Henry 
when, in the Virginia convention, he declared the power of manu- 
mission was given to Congress. He did not hesitate to argue 
against the adoption of the Constitution because it gave this 
power. And shall we be less perspicacious for freedom than this 
Virginia statesman was for slavery ? Discerning this power he 
confessed his dismay ; but let us confess our joy. 

We have already seen that slavery can find no support in the 
Constitution. Glance now at the positive provisions by which it 
is brought completely under the control of Congress. 

1. First among the powers of Congress and associated with 
the power to lay and collect taxes, is that " to provide for the 



common defence and general welfare.'* It has been questioned 
whether this is a substantive power, or simply incident to that with 
which it is associated. But it seems difficult, if not absurd, to 
insist that Congress has not this substantive power. Shall it not 
provide for the common defence? Shall it not provide for the 
general welfare ? If it cannot do these things in a great crisis 
it had better abdicate. In the discussions on the Constitution in 
the Virginia convention, Mr. George Mason, one of its most de- 
cided opponents, said ; " That Congress should have power to pro- 
vide for the general welfare of the Union, I granV (2 Eliot's 
Debates, 327.) But the lai^guage of Patrick Henry, to which 
allusion has been already made, was still more explicit. He fore- 
saw that this power would naturally be directed against slaveryj 
and he said : 

" Slavery is detested. We feel its fatal effects. We deplore 
it with all the pity of humanity. Let all these considerations, 
at some future period, press with full force on the minds of Con- 
gress. Let that urbanity which, I trust, will distinguish Ameri- 
cans, and the necessity of national defence — let all these things 
operate on their minds; they will search that paper [the Constitu- 
tion] and see if they have the power of manumission. And have 
they not, sir ? Have they not the power to provide for the general 
defence and welfare f May they not think that they call for the 
abolition of slavery ? May they not pronounce all the slaves free ? 
And will they not be warranted by that power ? This is no am- 
biguous implication or logical deduction. The paper speaks to the 
point. They have the power in clear and unequivocal terms, and will 
clearly and certainly exercise it.'' — Eliot's Debates, vol. 3. p. 590. 

Language could not be more positive. To all who ask for the 
power of Congress over slavery, here is a sufficient answer ; and 
remember that this is not my speech, but the speech of Patrick 
Henry, who says that the Constitution " speaks to the point." 

2. Next comes the clause, " Congress shall have power to de- 
clare war ; to raise and support armies ; to provide and maintain 
a navy." A power like this is from its very nature unlimited. — 
In raising and supporting an army, in providing and maintaining 
a navy. Congress is not restrdined to any particular class or color. 
It may call upon all and authorize that contract which the Govern- 
ment makes with an enlisted soldier. But such a contract would 
be in itself an act of manumission ; for a slave cannot make a 
contract. And if the contract be followed by actual service, who 
can deny its completest efficiency in enfraiichising the soldier- 
slave and his whole family ? Shakspeare, immortal teacher, gives 
expression to an instinctive sentiment wlien ho makes Henry V, 



8 

on the eve of the battle of Agincourt, encourages his men by pro- 
mising, 

'* For he to-day that sheds his blood with me, 
Shall be my brother ; be he ne'er so vile, 
This day shall gentle his condition.''^ 

3. There is still another clause; "The United States shall 
guaranty to every state in this Uuion a republican form of govern- 
ment." There again is a plain duty. But the question recurs, 
what is a republican form of government ? John Adams, in the 
correspondence of his old age, says : 

" The customary meanings of the words republic and common- 
wealth have been infinite. They have been applied to every Gov- 
ernment under heaven ; that of Turkey and that of Spain, as well 
as that of Athens and of Rome, of Geneva and San Marino." — 
Johji Adam's Works, volume 10, page 378. 

But the guarantee of a republican form of government must 
have a meaning congenial with the purposes of the Constitution. 
If a Government like that of Turkey, or even like that of Yenice, 
could come within the scope of this guarantee, it would be of little 
value. It would be words and nothing more. Evidently it must 
be construed so as to uphold the Constitution according to all the 
promises of its preamble, and Mr. Madison has left a record, first 
published to the Senate by the distinguished Senator from Ver- 
mont, [Mr. CoLLAMER,] the chairman of the Committee on the 
Library, showing that it was originally suggested in part by the 
fear of slavery, so that in construing it we must not forget slavery. 
The preamble and the record are important, disclosing the real 
intention of this guarantee. But no American need be at a loss 
to designate some of the distinctive elements of a republic ac- 
cording to the idea of American institutions. These will bo 
found, first, in the Declaration of Independence, by which it is 
solemnly announced " that all men are endowed by their Creator 
with certain unalienable rights ; that among these are life, liberty, 
and the pursuit of happiness." xind they will be found, secondly, 
in that other guarantee and prohibition of the Constitution, in 
harmony with the Declaration of Independence : " No person shall 
be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law. "^^ 
Such are some of the essential elements of a " republican form of 
governmentj" which cannot be disowned by us without disowning 
the very muniments of our liberties ; and it is these which the 
United States arc bound to guaranty. But all these make 
slavery impossible. It is idle to say that this result was not an- 
ticipated. It would be, then, only another illustration that our 
fathers " builded wiser than they knew." 

4. But, independent of the clause of guarantee, there is the 
clause just quoted, which in itself is a source of power : "No per- 



^on shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property wit/wut due pro- 
cess of law." This was a part of the amendments to the Constitu- 
tion proposed by the First Congress, under the popular demand 
for a Bill of Rights. Though brief, it is in itself alone a whole 
Bill of Rights. Liberty can be lost only by " due process of law," 
words borrowed from the old liberty-loving common law, illustra- 
ted by our master in law. Lord Coke, but best explained by the 
late Mr. Justice Bronson, of New York, in a judicial opinion 
where he says : 

" The meaning of the section then seems to be, that no member 
of the State shall be disfranchised or deprived of any of his rights or 
privileges unless the matter shall be adjudged against him upon 
trial had according to the course of common law. The words 
*due process of law ' in this place cannot* mean less* than a prose- 
cution or suit instituted and conducted according to the prescribed 
forms and solemnities for ascertaining guilt or determining the 
title to property." — 4 Hiirs Reports, 146. 

Such is the protection which is thrown by the Constitution over 
every " person," without distinction of race or color, class or 
condition. There can be no doubt about the universality of this 
protection. All, without exception, come within its scope. Its 
natural meaning is plain ; but there is an incident of history 
which makes it plainer still, excluding all possibility of misconcep- 
tion. A clause of this character was originally j-ecommended as 
an amendment by two slave States, North Carolina and Virginia, 
but it was restrained by them to freemen, thus : " No freemen 
ought to be deprived of his life, liberty, or property but by the 
law of the land^ But, when the recommendation came before 
Congress, the word " person " was substituted for *' freemen," and 
the more searching phrase "due process of law" was substituted 
for " the law of the land." In making this change, rejecting the 
recommendation of two slave States, the authors of this amend- 
ment revealed their purpose, that no person wearing the human 
form should be deprived of liherty without due process of law ; 
and the proposition was adopted by the votes of Congress and 
then of the States as a part of the Constitution. Clearly on its 
face it is an express guarantee of personal liberty and an express 
prohibition against its invasion anywhere. 

In the face of this guarantee and prohibition — for it is both — 
how can any " person " be held as a slave? But it is sometimes 
said that this provision must be restrained to places within the 
exclusive jurisdiction of the national Government. Let me say 
frankly that such formerly was my own impression, often avowed 
in this Chamber : but I never doubted its complete efficacy to ren- 
der slavery unconstitutional in all such places, so that " no per- 



10 

son " could be held as a slave at the national Capitol or in any 
national territory. Constitutionally slavery has always been an 
outlaw wherever that provision of the Constitution was applica- 
ble. Nobody doubted that it was binding on the national courts, 
and yet it was left unexecuted — a dead letter, killed by the pre- 
dominant influence of slavery, until at last Congress was obliged 
by legislative act to do what the courts had failed to do, and to 
put an end to slavery in the national Capitol and national terri- 
tories. 

But there are no words in this guarantee and prohibition by 
which they are restrained to any exclusive jurisdiction. They 
are broad and general as the Constitution itself; and since they 
are in support of human rights they cannot be restrained by any 
interpretation. There is'no limitation in them, and nobody can sup- 
ply any such limitation, without encountering the venerable max- 
im of law, Impius et crudelis qui lihertati non favet — ''Impious 
and cruel is he who does not favor liberty." Long enough courts 
and Congress have merited this condemnation. The time has 
come when they should merit it no longer. The Constitution 
should become a living letter under the predominant influence of 
freedom. It is this conviction which has brought petitioners to 
Congress, during the present session, asking that the Constitution 
shall be simply executed against slavery and not altered. Ah ! 
sir, it would be a glad sight to see that Constitution, which we 
have all sworn to support, interpreted generously, nobly, glorious- 
ly for freedom, so that everywhere within its influence the chains 
should drop from the slave. If it be said that this w^as not anti- 
cipated at the time of the adoption of the Constitution, I remind 
you of the words of Patrick Henry at the time when he said, 
" the paper speaks to the point." No doubt. It does speak to 
the point, especially since the adoption of the amendments. 
Cicero preferred to err with Plato rather than to think right with 
other men. And pardon me if on this occasion, when my country 
is in peril from slavery, and when human rights are to be rescued, 
I prefer to err with Patrick Henry, in assuming power for free- 
dom, rather than to think right with Senators who hesitate in 
such a cause. 

• Mr. President, thus stands the case. There is nothing in the 
Constitution on which slavery can rest, or find any the least sup- 
port. Even on the face of that instrument it is an outlaw; but if 
we look further into its provisions we find at least four distinct 
sources of power, which, if executed, must render slavery impos- 
sible, while the preamble makes them all vital for freedom : first, 
the power to provide for the common defense and general welfare^ 
secondly, the power to raise armies and maintain navies; thirdly, 



11 

the power to guaranty to every State a republican form of gov- 
ernment ; and fourthly, the power to secure liberty to every per- 
son restrained without due process of law. But all these provis- 
ions are something more than powers ; thei/ are duties also. And 
yet we are constantly and painfully reminded in this Chamber 
that pending measures against slavery are unconstitutional. Sir, 
this is an immense mistake. Nothing against slavery can be uncon- 
stitxitional. It is only hesitation which is unconstitutional. 

And yet slavery still exists — in defiance of all these requirements 
of the Constitution ; nay, more, in defiance of reason and justice, 
which can never be disobeyed with impunity — it exists, the per- 
petual spoiler of human rights and disturber of the public peace, 
degrading master as well as slave, corrupting society, weakening 
Government, impoverishing the very soil itself, and impairing the 
natural resources of the country. Such an outrage, so offensive in 
every respect, not only to the Constitution, but also to the whole 
system of order by which the universe is governed, is plainly a 
national nuisance, which, for the general welfare, and the name of 
justice, ought to be abated. But at this moment, when it menaces 
the national life, it will not be enough to treat slavery merely as 
a nuisance, for it is much more. It is a public enemy and traitor 
wherever it shows itself, to be subdued, in the discharge of solemn 
guarantees of Clovernment and of personal rights, and in the ex- 
ercise of unquestionable and indefeasable rights of self-defense. 
All now admit that in the rebel States it is a public enemy and 
traitor, so that the rebellion may be seen in slavery, and slavery 
may be seen in the rebellion. But slavery throughout the coun- 
try, everywhere within the national limits, is a living unit, one and 
indivisible — so that even outside the rebel States it is the same 
public enemy and traitor, lending succor to the rebellion, and 
holding out "blue lights" to encourage and direct its operations. 
But whether regarded as national nuisance or as public enemy 
and traitor, it is obnoxious to the same judgment and must be 
abolished. 

If, in abolishing slavery, any injury were done to the just 
interests of any human being, or to any rights of any kind, there 
might be something " to give us pause," even against these irre- 
sistible requirements. But nothing of the kind can ensue. No 
just interests and no rights can suffer. It is the rare felicity of 
such an act, as well outside as inside the rebel States, that, while 
striking a blow at the rebellion, and assuring future tranquility, 
so that the Republic shall no longer be a house divided against 
itself, it will add at once to the value of the whole fee simple 
wherever slavery exists, will secure individual rights, and will 
advance civilization itself. 



• 12 

There is another motive to abolish slavery at this time. Em- 
battled armies now stand face to face, on the one side fighting for 
slavery. The gauntlet that has been flung down we have yet 
taken up only in part. In abolishing slavery entirely we take up 
the gauntlet entirely. Then we can look with confidence to the 
blessings of Almighty God apon our arms. *' 'Till America comes 
into this measure," said John Jay during the Revolution, "her 
prayers to Heaven will be impious." So long as we sustain 
slavery, so long as wc hesitate to strike at it, the heavy battalions 
of our armies will fail in power. Sir Giles Overreach found his 
sword, as he attempted to draw it, " glued with orphan's tears." 
Let not our soldiers find their swords "glued" with the tears of 
the slave. 

There is one question and only one which rises in our path ; and 
this only because the national representatives have so long been 
drugged and drenched with slavery, which they have taken in all 
forms, whether of dose or douche, that, like a long-sufi'ering pa- 
tient, they are not yet emancipated from its influence. I refer, of 
course, to the question of compensation under the shameful as- 
sumption that there can be property in man. Sir, there was a 
moment when I was willing to pay money largely, or at least to 
any reasonable amount, for emancipation; but it was as ransom, 
and never as compensation. Thank God! that time has now 
passed, never to return; and simply because money is no longer 
needed for the purpose. Our fathers^ under Washington, never 
paid the Algerines for the emancipation of our enslaved fellow- 
citizens, except as ransom, and they ceased all such tribute when 
emancipation could be had without it. Such must be our rule 
now. Any other rule "would be to impoverish the Treasury for 
nothing. The time has come for the old tocsin to sound, " Mil- 
lions for defense, not a cent for tribute." Ay, sir ; millions of 
dollars — with millions of strong arms also — to defend our country 
against slave-masters : but not a cent for tribute to slave- 
masters. 

But if money is to be paid as compensation, clearly it cannot 
^0 to the master, who for generations has robbed the slave of his 
toil and all its fruits, so that, in justice, he may be regarded now 
as the trustee of accumulated earnings with interest which he has 
never paid over. Any money paid as compensation must belong, 
every dollar of it, to the slave. If the case were audited in 
Heaven's chancery, there must be another allowance for the denial 
of inestimable rights. The loss of wages may be estimated, but 
where is the tariff or price-current by which those other losses 
which have been the lot of every slave shall be determined ? 
Mortal arithmetic is impotent to assess the fearful sum total. In 



u 

presence of this infinite responsibility the whole question must be- 
referred to that other tribunal where master and slave will be- 
equal, while infinite wisdom tempers justice with mercy. 

But the proposition of compensation is founded on the intolerable- 
assumption of property in man, an idea which often intrudes into 
these debates, sometimes from its open vindicators and sometimes 
from others, who reluctantly recognize it, but allow it to influence 
their conduct which is thus " sicklied o'er " with slavery. Sir, 
parliamentary law must be observed ; but if an outburst of indig- 
nant hisses were ever justiable in a parliamentary assembly it 
ought to break forth at every mention of this proposition, what- 
ever form it may take — whether of daring assumption, or the 
mildest suggestion, or equivocation even. Impious toward God 
and insulting toward man, it is disowned alike by the conscience- 
and the reason ; nor is there any softness of argument or phrase by 
which its essential wickedness can be disguised. The fool hath 
said in his heart that there is no God; but it is kindred folly to 
say that there is no Man. The first is Atheism, and the second m 
like unto the first. 

Foremost of all persons in history who have vindicated human 
liberty, and associated their names with, it forevermore, stands 
John Milton, the Secretary of Oliver Cromwell and the author of 
Paradise Lost. Cradled under a lawless royalty, he helped to 
found and support the English Commonwealth, while in all that 
he wrote he pleaded for human rights now in defense of the Eng- 
lish people, who had beheaded their king, and now in immortal 
poems which show how wisely and well he loved the cause which 
he had made his own. Nowhere has the assumption of property 
in man been encountered more completely, than in the conversa- 
tion between the Archangel and Adam, after the former had pic- 
tured a hunter whose game was "men, not beasts :" 

•* O execrable So7i ! so to aspire 

Above his brethren, to himself assuming 
Autliority usurped, from God not given I 
He gave us only over beast, fish, fowl. 
Dominion absolute ; that right we hold 
By His donation; but man over men 
He made not Lord, svich title to Himself 
Reserving, human left from human free. 

Paradise Lost, Book Twelte — 64 — 73. 

But every asserter of property in man puts himself in the very 
place of this hunter of " men, not beasts," who is described as 
" < .ocrable son so to aspire." The language is strong, but not too 
strong. "Execrable" is the assumption ; "execrable" wherever 
made ; " execrable " on the plantation ; " execrable" in this cham- 
ber ; " execrable" in all its forms ; " execrable " in all its conse- 
quences ; especially " execrable" as an apology for hesitation 
against slavery. The assumption, wherever it shows itself, must 



14 

like Satan himself, in whom it has its origin, be beaten down 
under our feet. 

Again, we are brought by learned Senators to the Constitution, 
which requires that there shall be "just compensation" where 
" private property" is taken for public use. But plainly on the 
present ocasion the requirement of the Constitution is absolutely 
inapplicable, for there is no " private property" to take. Slavery 
is but a bundle of barbarous pretensions, from which certain per- 
sons are to be released. At what price shall these pretensions be 
estimated? How much shall be paid for the controlling preten- 
sion of property in man ? How much shall be allowed for that 
other pretension to shut the gates of knowledge, and keep the 
victim from the Book of Life? How much shall be expended to 
redeem the pretension to rob a human being of all the fruits of 
his toil? And, sir, what "just compensation" shall be voted for 
the renunciation of that Heaven-defying pretension, too disgust- 
ing to picture, which, trampling on the most sacred relations, 
makes wife and child the wretched prey of lust or avarice? 
Let these pretensions be renounced, and slavery ceases to exist ; 
but there can be no " just compensation" for any such renuncia- 
tion. The human heart, reason, religion, the Constitution itself, 
rise in judgment against it. As well vote "just compensation '' 
to the hardened offender who renounces his disobedience to the 
Ten Commandments, and promises that he will cease to steal — 
that he will cease to commit adultery — and that he will cease to 
covet his neighbor's wife ! Aye, sir, there is nothing in the Con- 
stitution to sanction any such outrage. Such an appropriation 
would be unconstitutional. 

Mr. Madison said in the convention that " it was wrons: to ad- 
mit in the Constitution the idea that there could be property in 
man." (3 Madison Papers, 17<i9.) Of course it was wrong, It 
was criminal and unpardonable. Thank God! it was not done. 
But Senators admit this "idea" daily. They take it from them- 
selves, and then introduce it where Mr. Madison said it was 
"wrong." But if it was "wrong" at the adoption of the Con- 
stitution to do this thing, how much worse is it now ! There is 
no instinct of patriotism, as there is no conclusion of reason, 
which must not be against the abomination ; and yet, sir, it is al- 
lowed to enter into these debates. Sometimes it stalks, and 
sometimes it skulks; but whether stalking or skulking, it must be 
encountered with the same indignant rebuke, until it shall no 
longer venture to show its head. 

Putting aside, then, all objections that have been interposed, 
whether proceeding from open opposition or from lukewarm sup- 
port, the great question recurs — that question which dominates 



u 

this whole debate, how shall slavery be overthrowji ? The answer 
is three-fold : first, by the courts, declaring and applying the true 
principles of the Constitution ; secondly, by Congress, in the 
exercise of the powers which belong to it ; and, thirdly, by the 
people, through an amendment to the Constitution. Courts, Con- 
gress, people, all may be invoked, and the occasion will justify 
the appeal. 

1. Lot the appeal be made to the courts. But alas ! one of the 
saddest chapters in our history has been the conduct of judges, 
who have lent themselves to the support of slavery. Injunctions 
of the Constitution, guarantees of personal liberty, and prohibi- 
tions against its invasion, have all been forgotten. Courts, which 
should have been asylums of liberty, have been changed into 
strongholds of slavery, and the Supreme Court of the United 
States, by a final decision as shocking to the Constitution as to 
the public conscience, proclaimed itself the tutelary stronghold of 
all. It has boon part of the calamity of the times, that, under 
the influence of slavery, justice, like Astrjea of old, had fled. But 
now at last, in a regenerated Republic, with the power of slavery 
waning, and the people rising in judgment against it, let us hope 
that the judgments of courts may bo reconsidered, and that the 
powers of the Constitution in behalf of liberty may be fully exer- 
cised, so that human bondage shall no longer find an unnatural 
support from the lips of judges. 



ami ancient frauds shall fail. 



Returning Justice lift aloft her scale."' 

Sir, no court can afl:brd to do an act of wrong. Its business is 
justice ; and when, under any apology, it ceases to do justice, it 
loses those titles to reverence which otherwise are so willingly 
bestowed. There are instances of great magistrates who have 
openly declared their disobedience to laws " against common right 
and reason," and their names are mentioned with gratitude in the 
history of jurisprudence. There are other instances of men hold- 
ing the balance and the sword, whose names have been gathered 
into a volume as "atrocious judges." If our judges, who have 
cruelly interpreted the Constitution in favor of slavery, do not 
come into the latter class, they clearly can claim no place among 
those others who have stood for justice, like the rock on which the 
sea breaks in idle spray. Vainly do you attempt to frame injustice 
into a law, or to sanctify it by any judgment of court. From 
Cicero we learn that " if laws were made merely by the ordinan- 
ces of the people, the decrees of princes, or the sentences of judges, 
then the setting up forged wills might be lawful, adultery might 
be lawful." (De Leglbns, Lib. I, § 16 ;) and Augustine tells us 
with saintly authority, that what is unjust cannot be law. Every 



16 

law and every judgment of court, to be binding, must have at its 
back the everlastinis:, irrepealable law of God. Doubtless the 
model decision of the American Bench, destined to be quoted 
hereafter with the most honor, because the boldest in its conform- 
ity with the great principles of humanity and social order, was 
that of the Vermont judge, who refused to surrender a fugitive 
slave until his pretended master could show a title-deed from the 
Almighty. 

But the courts have no longer any occasion for such boldness. 
They need not step outside the Constitution. It is only needed 
that they should follow just principles in its interpretation. Let 
them be guided by a teacher like Edmund Burke, who spoke as 
follows : 

^^Men cannot covenant themselves out of their rights and their duties; 
nor by any other means can arbitrary power be conveyed to any 
man. Tliose who give to others such rights, perform acts that are 
void as they are given.'' * ^ -;(■ ^ -x- -x- 

"^ * " Those who give and those who receive arbitrary 
power are alike criminal, and there is no man but is bound to 
resist it to the best of his power, wherever it shows its face in the 
world. It is a crime to bear it wherever it can be rationally sha- 
ken off." — Speech on Impeachment of Warren Hastings. 

Or, let them be guided by that other teacher, Lord Chatham, 
when he said : 

"With respect to the decisions of the courts of justice, I am far 
from denying their due weight and authority; yet placing them 
in the most resijectable view, I will consider them, not as law, 
but as an evidence of the law ; and before they can arrive at even 
that degree of authority, it must appear that they are founded in, 
and conlirmed by, reason ; that they are supported by precedents, 
taken from good and moderate times: that they do not contradict 
any positive law ; that they are submitted to without reluctance 
by the people; that they are unquestioned by the legislature, 
(which is equivalent to a tacit confirmation) ; and what, in my 
judgment is by far the most important, that they do not violate the 
spirit of the Constitution.''' — Speech of Lord Chatham in 1770, with 
regard to the proceedings on the Middlesex Election, 

If courts were thus inspired, it is easy to see that slavery would 
disappear under their righteous judgment. 

2. But unhappily the courts will not perform the duty of the 
hour, and we must look elsewhere. An appeal must be made to 
Congress ; and here, as has been fully developed, the powers are 
ample, unless in their interpretation you surrender in advance to 
slavery. By a single brief statute, Congress may sweep slavery 
out of existence. Patrick Henry saw and declared that, under 



the influence of a gi'owing detestation of slavery and the increas- 
ing " urbanity" of the people, this must be expected, while all the 
capacious war powers proclaim trumpet- tongued that it can be 
done constitutionally, and tiie peace powers now echo back the 
war powers. 

Of course we encounter here again the " execrable " pretension 
of property in man, and the claim of "just compensation " for the 
renunciation of Heaven-defying wrongs. But this pretension is 
no more applicable to abolition by act of Congress than to aboli- 
tion by an amendment of the Constitution ; so that if the claim of 
"just compensation" can be discarded in one case it can be in the 
other. But the votes that have already been taken in the Senate 
on the latter proposition testify that it is discarded. Sir, let the 
'' execrable" pretension never again be named, except for condem- 
nation, no matter how or when it appears or what the form it may 
take. Let the " idea," which was originally branded as so 
*' wrong" that it could not find a place in the Constitution, never 
find a place in our debates. 

But even if Congress be not prepared for that single decisive 
measure which shall promptly put an end to this whole question 
and strike slavery to death, there are other mensures by which 
this end may be hastened. The towering Upas may be girdled, 
even if it may not be felled at once to the earth. Already, by 
acts of Congress, slavery has been abolished in the national capi- 
tal and in the national territories. But this is not enough. 

The fugitive slave bill, conceived in iniquity and imposed upon 
the North as a badge of subjugation, may be repealed. 

The coastwise slave trade may be deprived of all support in the 
statute book. 

The traffic in human beings, as an article of " commerce among 
the States," may be extirpated. 

And, above all, that odious rule of evidence, so injurious to 
justice and discreditable to the country, excluding the testimony 
of colored persons in national courts, may be abolished. 

And there is one other thing which must done. The enlistment 
of colored persons must be encouraged by legislation in every 
possible form : for enlistment is emancipation. That contract by 
which the soldier-slave promises service at the hazard of life, like 
the contract of marriage, fixes the equality of the parties, w^hich 
Congress, for the national defense, and the national character also, 
must sacredly maintain. 

All these things at least may be done, and, when they are done, 
Heaven and earth will be glad, for they will see an assurance that 
all will be done. 



18 

But even these will not be enough. The people must be sum- 
moned to confirm the whole work. It is for them to put the cap- 
stone upon the sublime structure. An amendment of the Consti- 
tution may do what courts and Congress decline to do, or, even 
should they act, it may cover their action with its panoply. Such an 
amendment, in any event, will give completeness and permanence 
to emancipation and bring the Constitution into avowed harmony 
with the Declaration of Independence. Happy day, long wished 
for, destined to gladden those beautified spirits who have labored 
on earth to this end, but died without the sight. 

And yet let us not indiscreetly take counsel of our hopes. From 
the nature of the case such an amendment cannot be consummated 
at once. Time must intervene, with opportunities of opposition. It 
can pass Congress only by a vote of two- thirds of both branches. 
And when it has passed both branches of Congress it must be 
adopted by the Legislatures of three-fourths of the States. Even 
under the most favorable circumstances it is impossible to say 
when it can become part of the Constitution. Too tardily, I fear, 
for all the good that is sought. Therefore I am not content with 
this measure alone. It postpones till to-morrow what ought to be 
done to-day; and I much fear that it may be made an apology for 
indifference to other propositions, which are of direct practical 
significance ; as if it were not unpardonable to neglect for a day 
the duties we owe to Human Eights. 

"To-morrow, ani to-morrow, and to-morrow. 
Creeps in this petty pace Irom day to day, 
To the last syllable of recorded time ; 
And all our yesterdays have lighted fools 
The way to dusty death." 

For myself let me confess that, in presence of the mighty events 
of the day, I feel how insignificant is any individual, whether 
citizen or Senator ; and yet, humbly longing to do my part, I can- 
not consent to put off till to-morrow what ought to be done to day. 
Beyond my general desire to see an act of universal emancipation 
that shall at once and forever settle this great question, so that it 
may no longer be the occasion of strife between us, there are two 
other ideas which are ever present to my mind as a practical 
legislature: first, to strike at slavery wherever I can hit it; and 
secondly, to clean the statue book of all existing supports of slavery, 
so that it may find nothing there to which it may cling for life. 
To do less than this at the present moment, when slavery is still 
menacing, would be an abandonment of duty. 

So long as a single slave continues anywhere beneath the flag 
of the Republic I am unwilling to rest. Too well I know the 
vitality of slavery with its infinite capacity of propagation, and 
how little slavery it takes to make a slave State with all the cruel 



Id 

pretensions of slavery. The down of a single thistle is full of all 
possible thistles, and a single fish is said to contain two hundred 
millions of eggs, so that the whole sea might be stocked from its 
womb. 

The founder of political science in modern times, writer as 
well as statesman, Machiavelli, in his most instructive work, the 
Discourses on Livj, has a chapter entitled, "To have long life in 
a republic, it is neccessary to draw it back often to its origin : " 
and in the chapter he shows how the original virtue in which a 
republic was founded becomes so far corrupted, that, in the pro- 
cess of time, the body-politic must be destroyed ; as in the case 
of the natural body, where, according to the doctors of medicine, 
there is somcting added daily which perpetually requires cure, 
quod quotedie aggregatur ahqiiid, quod quandoque indiget curatione. 
He teaches under this head that republics are brought back to 
their origin, and the principles in which they were founded, by 
pressure without where prudence fails within, and he affirms that 
the destruction of Rome by the Gauls was necessary that the 
republic might have a new birth, and thus acquire new life and 
new virtue, all of which ensued when the barbarians had been 
driven back. The illustration, perhaps is fanciful, but there is 
wisdom in the counsel, and now the time has come for its applica- 
tion. The Gauls are upon us, not, however, from a distance, but 
domestic Gauls, and we, too, may profit by the occasion to secure 
for the Republic a new birth, that it may acquire new life and 
new virtue. Happily, in our case the way is easy, for it is only 
neccessary to carry the Republic back to its baptismal vows, and 
the declared sentiments of its origin. There is the Declaration 
of Independence : let its solemn promises be redeemed, There is 
the Constitution: let it speak, according to the promises of the 
Declaration. 

Mr. President, the immediate question now before us is on the 
proposition to prohibit slavery everywhere throughout the whole 
country by constitutional amendment; and here I hope to be 
indulged for a moment with regard to the form which it should 
take. A new text of the Constitution cannot be considered too 
carefully even in this respect, especially when it embodies a new 
article of freedom. Here for a moment we are performing some- 
thing of that duty which belongs to the conditores imperii, placed 
foremost by Lord Bacon among the actors in human affairs, and 
"words" become "things." From the magnitude of the task we 
may naturally borrow circumspection, and I approach this part of 
the question with suggestion rather than argument. 

Let me say frankly that I should prefer a form of expression 
different from that which has the sanction of the committee. They 



20 

have selected what was intended for the old Jeffersonian ordinance 
sacred in our history, although, let me add, they have not imitated 
it closely. But I must be pardoned if I venture to doubt the ex- 
pediency of perpetuating in the Constitution language which, if it 
have any signification, seems to imply that '' slavery or involuntary 
servitude " may be provided " for the punishment of crime." It is 
supposed that there was a reason for this language when it was 
first employed, but that reason no longer exists. There can be no 
reason why slavery should not be forbidden positively and without 
exception, especially as " imprisonment " cannot be confounded 
with this " peculiar " wrong. If my desires could prevail, I would 
put aside the ordinance on this occasion, and find another form. 
I know nothing better than these words: 

" All persons are equal before the law, so that no person can 
hold another as a slave : and the Congress shall have the power to 
make all laws necessary and proper to carry this declaration in 
to effect everywhere within the United States and the jurisdiction 
thereof. " 

The words in the latter part supersede all questions as to the 
applicability of the declaration to the States. But the distinctive 
words in this clause assert the equality of all persons before the law. 
The language may be new in our country, but it is already well 
known in history. And here let me show how it has grown to its 
present place of authority. We must repair for a moment to 
Prance. 

The first constitution adopted by France, September, 1791, in 
the throes of revolution, was preceded by a Declaration of Rights, 
which, after setting forth that " ignorance, forgetfulness, or con- 
tempt of the rights of man are the sole causes of public evils and 
of the corruption of Governments. " undertakes to announce " the 
natural rights of man, inalienable and sacred, to the end that 
this Declaration, constantly present to all the members of the 
social system, may without cessation recall their rights and duties ; 
to the end that the acts of the legislative power and those of the 
executive power capable at each instant of being compared with 
the object of every political institution, may be more respected ; 
to the end that the claims of citizens, founded on simple and in- 
contestable principles, may turn always to the maintainance of the 
constitution, and the happiness of all." After this too elaborate 
preamble the declaration begins with an article, which has a gen- 
erality of expression, not unlike that of our own Declaration of 
Independence. 

** Art, 1, Men are born and continue free and equal in rights, ' 



21 

Next came the Constitution of June, 1793, which after a pre- 
amble, sets forth a series of articles, beginning with three, as fol- 
lows : 

"Art. 1. The object of society is the common happiness. Govern- 
ment is instituted to guaranty to man the enjoyment of his natural 
and imprescriptible rights. 

" 2. These rights are equality, liberty, security, property. 

" 3. All men are equal by nature and before the law. " 

Here the declaration in question begins to show itself. Men 
are equal by nature and before the law. 

This same Constitution concludes with what is called a guar- 
anty of rights, in the following article : 

'Art. 122. The Constitution guarantees to all Frenchmen 
equality, liberty, security, property, the public debt, the free ex- 
ercise of worship, common instruction, public assistance, the in- 
definite liberty of the press, the right of petition, the right to as- 
semble in public meetings, the enjoyment of all the rights of men. " 

Then came the constitutional charter of June, 1814, following 
the restoration of the Bourbons, which begins in the following 
article : 

"Art. 1. Frenchmen are equal before the law^ whatever may be 
otherwise their title and ranks. " 

This is followed by another, as follows : 

" Art 4. Their individual liberty is equally guarantied, so that 
no body can be prosecuted or arrested except in cases provided for 

by law, and in the form which it prescribes, " 

• 

The constitutional charter of August, 1830, at the installation 
of Louis Philippe as king, with La Fayette by his side, contains the 
articles already quoted from that of Louis XYIII, in the same 
words, placing the declaration of equality before the law in the 
front. 

And this article has been adopted in the charters of Belgium, 
Italy, Greece ; so that it is now the well-known expression of a 
commanding principle of human rights. 

It will be felt at once that this expression; " equality before the 
law" gives precision to that idea of human rights which is enun- 
ciated in our Declaration of Independence. The sophistries of 



22 

Calhoun, founded on the obvious inequalities of body and mind, 
are all overthrown by this simple statement, which, though bor- 
rowed latterly from France, is older than French history. The 
curious student will find in the ancient Greek of Herodotus a sin- 
gle word which supplies the place of this phrase, when he tells us 
that " the government of the many has the most beautiful name of 
wovofxia^^ or equality before the law. (Book 3, p. 80.) The father 
of history was right. The name is most beautiful ; but it is not a 
little singular that, in an age when equality before the law was 
practically unknown, the Greek language, so remarkable for its 
flexibility and comprehensiveness, supplied a single word, not to 
be found in modern tongues, to express an idea which has been 
authoritatively recognized only in modern times. Such a word in 
our own language to express that equality of rights which is 
claimed for all mankind might have surperseded some of the criti- 
cism to which this declaration has been exposed. 

Enough has been said to explain the orign of the expression 
which is now proposed. Though traced to distant antiquity and 
now adopted in various countries, it derives its modern authority 
from France, where it is the " well-ripened fruit " of an unpre- 
cedented experience in the discussion of great problems of politi- 
cal science. Naturally, it does not come from England ; for the 
idea itself finds little favor in that hierarchical kingdom. In 
France equality prevails more than liberty. In England liberty 
prevails more than equality. Here among us both should find a 
home, and such a declaration as I now propose, embodying liberty 
arid equality, will keep the double idea perpetually in the public 
mind and conscience, "to warn, to comfort, and command." The 
denial of Liberty in the rebel States begins with a denial of 
Equality, so that our work is not completely done without the as- 
sertion of both principles. 

Should the Senate not incline to this form, there is still another 
which I would suggest, as follows : 

" Slavery shall not exist anywhere within tbe United States or 
the jurisdiction thereof ; and the Congress shall have power to 
make all laws neccessary and proper to carry this prohibition into 
effect. " 

This is simple, and avoids all language which is open to ques- 
tion. The word " slavery " is explicit, and describes precisely 
what it is proposed to blast. There is no doubt with regard to 
its signification. It cannot be confounded with " the punishment 
of crime:" for imprisonment is not slavery; nor can any punish- 
ment take the form of a wrong which stands by itself, peculiar, 



terrible, outrageous. Therefore nothing about punishment should 
find a place in the rule which we ordain. 

But if the Senate is determined to adhere to the Jeffersonian 
ordinance, then I prefer that it should be the ordinance actually, 
and not as reported by the committee. And I would complete 
the work by expelling from the Constitution all those words 
which have been misconstrued, perverted and tortured to a false 
•support of slavery. 

But while desirous of seeing the great rule of freedom which 
we are about to ordain embodied in a text which shall be like the 
precious casket to the more precious treasure, yet I confess that I 
feel humbled by my own endeavors. And whatever may be the 
judgement of the Senate, I am consoled by the thought that the 
most homely text containing such a rule will be more beautiful far 
than any words of poetry or eloquence, and that it will endure to 
be read with gratitude when the rising dome of this Capitol, with 
the statue of Liberty which surmounts it, has crumbled to dust. 



CHAPIX, BROMELL & SCOTT, Cheap & Vrompt Job Printers, 8 Spruoe St., N. Y. 



THE OTIXG-XISTJ^JL, 



ANTI-SLAVERY AGITATORS. 



" There is not a man living who wishes more sincerely than I do to 
see a plan adopted for the abolition of slavery," — Oeorge Washington^. 
April i2th, 1786. 

"The scheme, my dear Marquis which you propose as a precedent 
to encourage the emancipation of the black people in this country from 
the state of bondage in which they are held, is a striking evidence of 
the benevolence of your heart." — Washington to Lafayette, 1783, 

**It is the most earnest wish of America to see an entire stop for- 
ever put to the wicked, cruel, and unnatural trade in slaves." — Meet- 
ting at Fairfax, Va, July, 18i/i, 111 ^, presided over hy Washington. 

"I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just. His jus- 
tice cannot sleep forever. " — Jefferson's Notes on Slavery inVirginia, 
1782. 

"The King of Great Britain has waged cruel war against human na- 
ture itself, violating its most sacred rights of life and liberty, in the 
persons of a distant people who never offended him ; captivating them 
and carrying them into slavery in another hemisphere, or to incur mis- 
erable death in their transportation hither. "— Jeff ersoii's Original 
Draft of the Declaration of Independance. 

"After the year 1800 of the Christion era, there shall be neither 
slavery nor involuntary servitude in any of the said States" (all of 
the territories then belonging to the United States). — Jefferson s Ordi- 
nance of 1787, unanimously approved hy Congress and signed hy Wash- 
ington. 

"We have seen the mere distinction of color made, in the most en- 
lightened period of time, a ground of the most oppressive dominion 
ever exercised by man over man." — James Madisori. 

"We have found that this evil has preyed upon the very vitals of 
the Union and has been prejudicial to all the States in which it has 
existed." — James Monroe. 

" The tariff was only the pretext, and disunion and a Southern Con- 
federacy the real object. The next pretext will be the negro or sla- 
very question* " — Andretv Jackson, May, 1833. 

" Sir, I envy neither the heart nor the head of that man from the 
North who rises here to defend slavery on principle," — John Randolph 
of Roanoke. 

" The people of Carolina form two classes, the rich and the poor. 
The poor are very poor; the rich, who have slaves to do thei r work, 
give them no employment. The little they get is laid out in brandy, 
not in books and newswapers ; hence they know nothing of the compar- 
ative blessings of our country, or of the dangers which threaten it ; 
therefore they care nothing about it. " — General Francis Marion to 
Baron De Kalh. ^^ . ^^ 

PD9.'t. '^ 



The Loyal Publication Society lias already issued a large 
number of Slips and Pamphlets, which have been widely cir- 
culated. Among the most important are the following : 

No. 1. Future of the Northwest. By Rohert Dak Owen.. 

2. Echo from the Army. 

3. Union Mass Meeting— Speeches of Brady, Van Buren, (^-c. 

4. Three Voices : the Soldier, Farmer, and Poet. 

5. Voices from the Army. 

6. Northern True Men. 

7. Speech of Major-General Butler. 

8. Separation j War without End. Ed. Laloidaye. 

9. The Venom and the Antidote. 

10. A Few "Words in Behalf ^of the Loyal Women of the United 

States. By One of Themselves. 

11. No Failure for the North. Atlanti-c Monthly. 

12. Address to King Cotton. Eugene Pelletan. 

13. How a Free People conduct a Long War. Stille. 

14. The Preservation of the^^Union, a National Economic Necessity. 

15. Elements of Discords in Secessia, &c., &c. 

16. No Party now, but all for our Country. Francis Lieher. 

17. The Cause of the War. Col. Charles Anderson. 

18. Opinions of the early Presidents and of the Fathers of the 

Republic upon Slavery, and upon Negroes as Men and Soldiers. 

19. Cinlieit nnb £xn\)cii uon Hermann Bafter. 

20. Military Despotism ! Suspension of the Habeas Corpus ! &c. 

21. Letter addressed to the Opera-House Meeting, Cincinnati. 

By Col. Charles Anderson. 

22. Emancipation is Peace. By Robert Dale Oicen. 

23. Letter of Peter Cooper on Slave Emancipation. 

24. Patriotism. Sermon by the Rev. Jos. Fransioli, of St. Peter's 

(Catholic) Church, Brooklyn. 

25. The Conditions of Reconstruction. By Rohert Dale Owen. 

26. Letter to the President. By Gen. A. J. Hamilton, of Texas, 

27. Nullification and Compromise : a Retrospective View. 

28. The Death of Slavery. Letter from Peter Cooper to Gov. Seymour. 

29. Slavery Plantations and the Yeomanry. By Francis Lieher. 

30. Rebel Conditions of Peace. 



31. Address of the Loyal Leagues. 

32. War Power of the President — Summary Imprisonment — 

by /. He er mans. 

33. The Two Ways of Treason. 

34. Monroe Doctrine. Bi/ Edward Everett, Sfc. 

35 The Arguments of Secessionists. Francis Lieber, 

36. Prophecy and Fulfilment. — Letter of A. H. Stephens. Address of 

E. W. Gantt. 

37. How the South Rejected Compromise, &c. Speech of Mr. Chase. 

38. Letters on our National Struggle. By Brigadier General Thomas 

Francis Meagher. 

39. Bible View of Slavery, By John H. Hopkins, D. D., Bishop of the 

Diocese of Vermont. Examined by Henry Drisler. 

40. The Conscription Act: a Series of Articles. By Geo. B. Butler, N. Y. 

41. Reply of De Gasparin, Laboulaye and others, to Loyal National League. 

42. The same in the original French. 

43. The same in German. 

44. First Anniversary Meeting of the Loyal Publication Society. 

45. Finances and Resources of the United States. Speech of the Hon. 

Henry G. Stebbins, in the House of Representatives, March 3, 1864. 

46. How the War was Commenced. An Appeal to the Documents. 

47. Results of the Serf Emancipation in Russia. 

48. Resources of the United States. By Samuel B. Ruggles. 

49. Soldiers' and Sailors' Patriotic Songs, 

50. The Constitution Vindicated — Nationality, Secession, Slavery. By 

James A. Hamilton. 
5L No Property in Man. Speech of Hon. Charles Sumner. 
52. Rebellion, Slavery, and Peace. By Hon. N. G. Upham. 



Loyal Leagues, Clubs, or individuals, may obtain any of our 
publications at the cost price, by application to the Executive 
Committee, or by calling at the Kooms of the Society, No. 863 
Broadway, where all information may be obtained relating to 
the Societv. 











P-n. 






^..'^^ „ sura • "^ C.*^ ^rCOvWA^ "^ l.'^ » 










^^ "^^ K^ ♦vsife*^" '^ A^ 






/t V ^ ' o » ,1 




-a/ 
^ 0,1' A V o * ^^ "» n "^ ^ A^^^ « ■» ■CL'^ ^ 








A^^ 

aV -^^ 




v-s^ 



















^-^ 

■^ 









\/ V-^'/ \'^^\/ V'^^''/ 





